ArticleDer Orthopade2021
[Microvascular reconstruction of foot defects using a free femoral periostal flap].
Article in Der Orthopade, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Reconstruction of posttraumatic soft tissue defects of the ankle using free fascial flaps from the anterolateral thigh].Unfallchirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023Article
- [Neurovascular interpositional femoral periosteal flap for accidental bolt gun injury of the hand].Unfallchirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe reconstruction of defects in the foot region is a challenge due to the anatomical peculiarities of the soft tissue covering.
objectiveThis article presents the results of the reconstruction of postoperative foot defects using the free femoral periosteal flap (FFPF). MATERIAL AND
methodsIn a patient collective (n = 10) with postoperative wound healing disorders of the foot, the defect zone was covered using a vascularized FFPF from the distal femoral region. The wound healing process was retrospectively analyzed.
resultsThe mean follow-up time was 20.2 ± 8.22 months (7-35 months). All patients had a soft tissue defect in the foot region with a mean area of 17.9 ± 3.72 cm
conclusionThe FFPF is an effective and elegant method for the regenerative reconstruction of defects with accompanying osseous components in the foot region. The FFPF has the advantage of instant thin and pliable tissue coverage in contrast to many other reconstructive methods. The FFPF can promote wound consolidation through the regenerative properties of a vascularized periosteal sheath in the context of a one-step and permanent infection control.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.